www.stonehenge-druids.org
Relationships between Druids and archaeologists are usually friendly but sometimes circumstances lead to this relationship becoming strained. Both seek truth from the evidence of our past, and in recent times relationships have been mutually warm and respectful; for example with the ‘Bluestone dig by Wainwright and Darvill’ last year.
However both Avebury and Stonehenge have been in the news recently, and doubtless will be again, over the issue of ancient remains. Very many people believe that the remains of our ancestors are special, a part of our faith and cultural heritage whose presence in the landscape is important.
Not all pagans, just as not all archaeologist, can agree on this subject or how to approach it and hence this has been left as a matter for individual conscience. It is an issue that is also about human decency and respecting the peace of the dead.
The Issues vary greatly with circumstances from site to site, for example, there may be destruction of the resting place as in a building project, or a risk of vandalism in vulnerable locations, or loss of future research potential given as reasons to retain human remains in University vaults and museums.
Equally, when clearly sacred and important to people who still revere the ancestors today there is a strong case for reburial. At the moment it is unclear what processes exist to seek a reasonable balance between seemingly incompatible interests. What is needed is for a process by which such remains are assessed, studied, and their place of rest decided allowing for preservation of their dignity.
Archaeologists have had a presumption of ‘scientific need’ as outweighing all other concerns in their favour, and a few seem unwilling to acknowledge or take into account other points of view or to allow that presumption to be challenged. At Stonehenge most of us believe the remains should be studied, small samples taken for dating etc, and then the rest returned with honour to the ground.
I feel for the authorities caught up in the midst of this debate between people of passion on all sides, and request that each person speak from their personal truth with integrity, whilst retaining general good will and respect for one another as is our way.May everyone involved act with honour and seek a reasonable way forwards that allows science, culture and the dignity of our ancestors to co-exist.
Images copyright: http://www.handswithenergy.co.uk/events/
Pictures below were taken on the 29th August 2008 on the grounds of a Riverside Project Dig, Stonehenge Aubrey hole 7, where Druids refused to give blessing to the excavation after learning that some archaeologists wish to permanently retain our ancestors
New on 7th June - Campaign begins at Stonehenge for the return of the Aubrey hole 7 ancestors
Video taken at the time
|
Reburial Issue Page Index |
Meeting with the Chief Scientist for English Heritage: Sebastian Payne, 22-2-2009
Sebastian Payne asked if he could meet with me to discuss the reburial issue and my submission to the Avebury consultation. Meeting on Sunday, we talked at length to explore the outlook on the issue from the perspectives of English Heritage, the law, culture, spirituality, the Druids and archaeologists.
It was a very useful and informative meeting. One thing that it very much brought home to me was that there are people with a great passion for understanding of our past, and truth, on all sides of the debate.
After speaking with Sebastian, I am optimistic that a balance can and will be found between the various interests that will satisfy most of what we all wish for and ensure that our ancestors are revered and honoured.
A decision on ‘Charlie’ the Avebury ancestor who’s fate is being argued is not expected for many months. Taking into account the very many submissions received by the enquiry will take a further three months after which any recommendations must be approved by committees at both DCMS and the National Trust. Sebastian is writing an update for us which I hope to publish here in due course. By Frank.
An open letter to: DCMS, English Heritage. Dated 1st June 2009
Dear Sirs,
You may be aware that on August 29th 2008 archaeologists from the ‘Riverside Project’ were granted permission by the DCMS and Department of Justice, to re-exhume ancestral remains deposited by an earlier dig into Aubrey hole number 7 at Stonehenge.
I am not opposed to scientific enquiry or fearful of such information as might result and have supported archaeology by giving my blessing to other parts of the Riverside Project and also the recent ‘blue stone’ dig by Professors Wainwright and Darvill last year at which I officiated as senior Druid present, was filmed by BBC Time-watch program and quoted in the Smithsonian.
It was our wish at the time of the Aubrey hole 7 excavation to provide spiritual observances to this event, but this idea fell into disarray when my colleagues and I learned from at least one senior Archaeologist present, Mike Pitt, that he intends to recommending that no part of these remains should be returned to the earth at Stonehenge once tests have been completed.
Our subsequent enquiries have revealed that any return for reburial is far from certain if this is left purely to the scientific interests to decide and that within the current process we have little opportunity for our input to be made other than by protest or direct legal challenge.
It should to be acknowledged that the research and conduct of the riverside team and bluestone teams have been of the highest standard and I would like it noted that no criticism is intended of their work or conduct, this letter relates only to the fate of the human remains unearthed.
The Aubrey ancestors being from within the Stonehenge itself are particularly revered and thought of by many as being literally spiritual ‘Guardians’, much as when a Christian might view the bones of a founding saint resting within a great cathedral. We still call to our ancestors in rites at Stonehenge, believing that if they so wish, these ancient guardians of our land and of our people may look in upon us. We honour them in this way by remembering them alongside the spirits of creation and the gods of our sacred land.
Stonehenge would lose some of its meaning and potency for many of us without the presence of those ancestors which is an unacceptable cultural and spiritual price to pay.
It is not just those of pagan spirituality who are affected. If the ancestors are not returned, all that future visitors to Stonehenge will be seeing and experiencing will be effectively a plundered tomb, whereas we have the opportunity to place the ancestors back into the circle so that all may look in wonder and experience Stonehenge as the place where the mighty sleep. This was once their Island.
The results of the Riverside excavation of Aubrey hole 7 were screened on television tonight, with the chief archaeologist Mike Parker Pearson saying that these hundreds of human remains consisting of mostly adult males, one female and two children were he would guess ‘a royal dynasty of some sort’ spanning 500 years and that Stonehenge itself was constructed as “a monument to the ancestors, to the ancient dead’.
It would not be so great a ‘monument to the ancestors, to the ancient dead’ if we allow our modern lust for filling museums to outweigh the more healthy desire to allow it to fulfil its original function as a temple still in use today and monument for those ancient Britons who built it.
There is currently a wider debate taking place about the dignity of ancient human remains and how this should be assessed and balanced with the desire to display or study them, but whilst that debate continues, I would ask on my own behalf and for all those who believe as I do that these particular ancestral remains must be viewed as exceptional to all others. They have unique circumstances that strongly suggest they be returned without undue delay to the place originally built to honour and accommodate them: Stonehenge.
Stonehenge is a monument to human creativity, imagination and technical excellence, and should continue to be resting place to the founders of our people who are still revered 5000 years later for their great achievements by the British people, and by the people of the world.
If it is our civilization for which these people provided the foundations, we owe them nothing less than to show them that our civilization today has not lost its ability to honour its ancestors.
I would like to see them reburied with full pagan honours as ‘ancestors’ and with state representation as befitting royalty of the ancient Britons. This would be the right thing to do. It would be an act of compassion and respect.
Will you please acknowledge that you recognise the exceptional ethical and cultural importance of these remains remaining buried at Stonehenge and commit to their reburial with honour at Stonehenge by the end of the current licence in 2010?
Yours faithfully
Frank Somers
Arthur and Frank are to jointly launch a public awareness campaign for the return of our ancestors at Stonehenge.
Their aim is to collect as many signatures as possible so that we can show to DCMS and Dept of Justice how seriously and passionately people feel that returning these ancestors is the only decent thing to do.
Both men stress that this is an issue greater than the politics of religion, individual reputation, or ego...and ask that all animosities and suspicions be lain to one side so that people of all cultures and faiths, who know in their hearts that reburial for the Aubrey hole 7 ancestors is the right and decent thing to do, may sign the petition and support the campaign.
Saturday 6th June
MOST RECENT UPDATES
The Launch Day,
Kaz and Bex, Arthur and Frank set up banners next to the visitor centre at around 10am. It was very windy and so a challenge for keeping information attached to the fence. Many people came over to talk with us, and most of these chose to sign our petition. These included many people of very many faiths which is most encouraging, in fact the first people to sign were Church of Jesus Christ and Latterday Saints from Utah USA. As Arthur commented at the time “It shows the depth of support we are generating” It clearly demonstrates that whatever your faith, to respect the ancestors is considered to be important, and that this is universal.
This page will continue to be updated
Arthur speaks to the assembled at Spring equinox
Sebastian’s letter can be found on a separate news page on this website
Monday 8th June, Arthur and Caz were joined on the picket today by Arch Druid Terry Dobney (The keeper of the Stones and senior Druid at Avebury) as he wishes to show the support of the Avebury community for the return of the Stonehenge ancestors. Avebury is also requesting the reburial of certain ancestors taken from the sacred landscape there.
Thursday 11th June, Pictured below, a group of students from Florida gladly sign our petition. Apparently our summer feels like their winter, oh dear. We were visited also by the excellent team from VISION NEWS, simply one of the best news teams around. We look forward to seeing their coverage in around a week or so. If you want to know the Wiltshire news at any time you can visit http://www.vision-news.tv/
This interview was conducted by Vision News.
Vision News is a small company which specialises in broadcast over the internet of news and special interest features from Wiltshire and the south west of England. They are well known to us from their interest in Stonehenge, for example their superb coverage of the New7Wonders competition. The material that vision-news produce often trumps the national media channels for content quality and composition, so we were naturally delighted when they took an interest in the reburial issue at Stonehenge.
To follow stories of interest in Wiltshire: www.vision-news.tv
What unites the people of the world?
Is there such a thing as ‘common decency’?
The diversity of people signing our petition seems to show that there is, and that all of us believe that the ancient dead should be laid to rest after archaeologists have removed them from their resting place.
Surprise Visit by EH top brass
The ‘Return the ancestors’ picket received a surprise visit last week from the Minister of Culture Media and Sport and the incoming Chairwoman of English Heritage who’s appointment becomes effective at the end of July 09. Neither would sign our petition however the effectiveness of our campaign at winning the support of visitors from all over the world was demonstrated by Arthur who showed them a sample of our petition and made clear that the Druids have the support of nearly everyone on this issue.
Today at the Stonehenge picket for the return of our ancestors saw the first of what may called ‘Informed debate’ in an unusual head to head between the Archaeologists and the Druids.
In the blue corner, Arthur Pendragon, Senior Druid and Co-Leader of the campaign for the return of the ancestors, in the red corner Julian Richards, TV Archaeologist, Author and Co-Director of the Riverside Project.
The Prize: to win over the support of a 14 year old Dutch lad called Hugo Schiffers who had wondered over to the picket and asked Arthur why the Archaeologists want to keep the remains of our ancestors.
After hearing the impassioned views of both sides Hugo considered for a few moments before reaching for a pen and signing the petition in support of reburial.
Druids 1 Archaeologists 0
Below: Frank interviews Arthur
Life on the picket is not easy.
Just a few weeks ago with the sun baking down we all got sunburn, my nose is still peeling even now.
Every day is different, the weather, and the people that we talk with make it so.
Many people ask if it is possible for women to be Druids, and the answer is most certainly YES. One such Druidess is Caz, who is also Arthurs partner, who has spent a great deal of time on the picket campaigning for the return and decent reburial of our ancestors. Caz has to this point been an unsung hero so I asked her if I could interview her.
As it turned out the interview did not go as expected and the sound is terrible but I have posted it here to show just how determined and special the people of the Stonehenge Druids are. It is not always fun being out there trying to draw attention to this issue and win support. It is a measure of how much we care and how deeply we feel about our ancestors that motivates us to be there.
The Ancestors approve
We meet many unusual and gifted people at Stonehenge, and being people of the old ways ourselves I suppose that we must rank among these.
Yesterday a lady approached us and explained that she had been walking around the sacred landscape surrounding Stonehenge. What was unusual about this lady was that she is a medium. She hadn’t expected or been looking for any strange encounters on her walk, however, she informed us with some emotion that she had been approached by some of our ancestors as she walked and they asked her to convey to us that they knew about the removal of human remains from Stonehenge, were pleased with us for standing up for their return!
They also communicated to her that they would like us to restore Stonehenge to her former glory.
Debate rages on other forums:
Someone wrote on another web site regarding this issue and I am grateful to them for they were raising arguments that I have heard others muttering and I decided to reply. Although this reply is personal, I hope that it makes clear my own reasons for supporting the reburial of the Aubrey 7 ancestors and my personal position on the wider reburial debate.
PFA : “Well, they are the realists. Pagans who actually work in archaeology, work in museums dealing with The Ancestors, other pagans who, reasonably, understand that if it wasn’t for archaeology, what we would actually know about paganism would be a few lines from Caesar.
For my part, I think I would quite like to be dug up in 4000 years, studied and displayed. I can’t think of a better way of honoring THIS ancestor
Oh, and I’d like the Rockers (Stonehenge Druids) to please take DNA tests and prove that they are related to the “ancestors” they want repatriated.“
My response which is my personal point of view is below:
Each discovery of ancient remains should be made available for scientific study for a period of up to two years, after which reburial should be the default proposition, but small samples could be taken for further analysis and 3D laser scans and photographs kept as a record of physical condition. In rare cases of exceptional scientific interest, then a longer term plan can be considered, but human remains should never be placed on open display. Reburial in sealed containers would ensure that if at some future date a commanding case can be made for disinterment, then the remains will not have deteriorated.
In general though, it should be remembered that these are the remains of human beings and that to disturb them at all is an ugly business, although sometimes on balance it is necessary, but to retain them longer than necessary is indecent. Stripping our sacred lands of our ancestral remains and especially our holy places is desecration.
You mention that you believe the Druids are trying to be like the native Americans and native Australians. Actually we are seeking a position where cultural and religious concerns have equal weighting to the scientific interest such that the science may continue AND the dead are not ultimately dishonoured or exploited.
Very many of the British people have ancestral links to the period of these ancestors; figures of between 40% and 70% have been quoted, but I suspect that you would not be happy with this and would only credit someone’s view as valid if they were a direct family descendant. In that case, I might suggest that if no archaeologist is a direct family descendant of the remains, then they cannot keep them. An interesting idea when you apply your same logic that way around, don’t you think?
In fact, the whole genetic argument is bankrupt in this instance, as we are the current priests of Stonehenge, with cultural links to that period of the past and a spiritual duty of care, so it is appropriate that we should speak on behalf of the dead and their dignity. If you started digging bodies up from a churchyard, you wouldn’t ask the priest if he was genetically related to the particular dead there of the first vicar; you would accept his view because he is the descendant by responsibility and role.
When we look at the knowledge gained by digging up our ancestors, it is interesting for sure, but has not provided a cure for cancer or solved the energy crisis; it hasn’t even solved the mystery of our origins and is never likely to. Each answer just raises further questions, and the theorists simply keep dreaming up new stories to challenge the traditions we hold dear, traditions which actually have been affirmed for the most part by the science.
Many of those theories, which rarely stand for more than a decade, can be highly offensive and even damaging to a living culture. The American natives were fed up with being described as primitive and as barbarians and having their tribal history and beliefs labeled as ‘Myth’ by outsiders applying western values where frankly they do not belong. They won their case for protective legislation on this basis alone.
Archaeologists here are terrified that we might do likewise, which is why so many of their academic cronies are trying to promote the idea that there is no Druid cultural legitimacy. In fact though, such legitimacy cannot be disproved on any number of levels, and we are being more than reasonable in the circumstances.
If a process can be agreed that evaluates each discovery of ancient human remains that is fair and gives equal weighting to the decency aspect, then this will help protect the future scientific freedoms rather than bringing them to a virtual standstill, as has happened in the USA. If they remain completely intransigent, the scientific community will force us to take a much stronger stance and challenge them outright, which puts the continuance of such studies at risk.
Some apologists for the archaeologists suggest that by digging up the dead we can tell their story.
This is not truly the case. You can tell at most what sex and age the person was, where they were born, what illnesses they had, maybe what they wore and the content of their last meal. You cannot tell who they loved, what made them laugh, how courageous they were, their favorite colour, what music they liked or what they aspired to in life, and these are the things that constitute a person’s story.
In many cultures, not only ours, to disturb the ancestors and to treat them with disrespect is to invite trouble. Whatever you might think about the spirit realms, in terms of whether they are real or not, if you assume not then you are applying modern values to an ancient situation which may be a severe mistake. Our forebears believed that the intercession of the ancestors for our benefit was vital to the well-being of the land and those still living.
What if they are correct and you are not?
If you would like to be preserved and gawped at by bored tourists for eternity, then by all means sign some sort of document to that effect and I hope that you wishes will be granted. Where no such permission is granted, then let’s do the decent thing, please, and lay the ancients back into the earth with honour.
Frank (31st July 2009)
Salisbury Journal reports on the Stonehenge campaign:
Significantly :
“A spokesman for English Heritage, which manages the site, said permission to excavate is only granted when the applicant can show the benefits in the increased knowledge are likely to outweigh the damage done by the work and that excavation of human remains is regulated under the Burial Act.
The spokesman said: “Scheduled monument consent was duly granted early in 2008, with appropriate conditions to safeguard the site and ensure what was found was appropriately studied,published and deposited in a museum.
“Human burials and human remains are an important part of the record of our shared past. English Heritage believes they should always be treated with respect, and that decisions about excavation, study, display and reburial should be based on the balance of benefit and harm, giving due weight to the views and interests of all those involved.”
We ask how depositing human remains on display in a museum constitutes ‘respect’ and challenge the claim that due weight has been given to the views and interests of all those involved as ‘Scheduled monument consent’ was granted in this case without talking with the Stonehenge Druids, and certainly not the public who our evidence shows overwhelmingly believe that these ancestors should be reburied at Stonehenge. Frank (6th August 2009)
It is one year since the Aubrey ancestors were removed from their resting place at Stonehenge in which time we still have not received any communication regarding a decision about their eventual return from the authorities.
We shall continue to campaign and bring this issue to the awareness of others, and to collect the signatures of those from around the world who agree that they should and must be returned. These ancestors will not be forgotten or abandoned by the Stonehenge Druids.
On Monday 31st Arthur Kazz and Frank were joined by our colleagues Jim, Dave Dean and others at Stonehenge to mark the year of absence with music and a special prayer to the ancestors.
Our special thanks to Peter Carson, Director for Stonehenge (EH) for taking our call on the bank holiday and allowing our prayers to be said at the Aubrey Hole 7 itself.
We played music on violin, guitar, mandolin and drum to enliven the marking of this milestone which attracted a lot of people to our campaign and we had many more signatures and kind words of support from people around the world.
Thankyou to the members of the Pagan Federation in Southend on Sea who sent a signed letter of support from their members.
The issue of reburial is one that arouses passions on all sides and rightly so as it is an important issue and one that we all have a responsibility to see correctly handled and followed through to a satisfactory conclusion; one that doesn’t handicap the scientific study of the past, doesn’t ignore the beliefs and values of those like ourselves who revere the ancestors of our sacred land in-situ, and which doesn’t disrespect or exploit the ancient dead.
Some people have suggested that by our campaigning for the reburial of the Guardians of Stonehenge that we would create enmity between Druids and archaeologists and harm the reputation of Druidry in the process. So far, the reverse has been true. The people most closely involved are actually learning more about one another and developing mutual respect, trust and admiration. We are civilised people who all in our way wish to do right by our ancient past.
Photo’s taken today (5th Sept 09) as we enjoy a late summer stroll in the Wiltshire countryside: Above left, Frank, Above and below right Kazz, and below left Arthur - The Druids campaigning for reburial. Centre in both picture a man we very much like and respect, Mike Parker Pearson, Senior archaeologist - Sheffield University, probably one of the greatest archaeologists of our time.
Druids meet Haida at Stonehenge (12th Sept 2009)
A delegation of 12 people from the Haida nation (North West American Indigenous people famous for introducing the totem pole) were on their way to Oxford in pursuit of the return of some of their revered ancestors. They decided to travel along the A303 and see Stonehenge on their way and were astonished to find the Druids there campaigning for the return of our ancestors for reburial.
Druids and Haida exchanged stories and warm greetings between cultures, and they have offered to write supporting our cause and to send representatives to our spring equinox celebration.
Government response to ‘Online Petition’ (29th Sept 2009)
Supporters of the reburial campaign for the Stonehenge guardians placed a petition on-line on the government website. Below, the original online petition.
The Government response is below:
The significant point to note is the last paragraph of the government response which indicates a review of the law and consultation on any proposals.
This has the potential to be a step forwards on the general topic of reburial so long as representations and proposals are balanced, and it isn’t just an exercise in giving the appearance of consulting whilst continuing to give advantage to only one point of view.
This does not effect the specific and unique situation facing the Stonehenge Guardians, we will continue to raise awareness and add signatures to our petition, and still seek input to decision the process if an extension to the existing licence is requested and we wish to see the guardians returned to the earth at Stonehenge on time in 2010.
“We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to ensure the remains of this countrys ancestors are returned to the ground at Stonehenge.”
Details of Petition:
“There is currently a huge archaeological dig taking place at Stonehenge (The Riverside Project) August/September 2008. The Senior Archaeologists concerned - Mike Pitts, Julian Richards and Mike Parker Pearson are looking at several areas at Stonehenge including the Aubrey Holes specifically No.7 which contains the remains of up to 50 bodies - The Guardians of Stonehenge. These archaeologists have removed these remains from the ground and they have been sent away for analysis. They will give no confirmation that these remains will be returned to their resting place at Stonehenge. Much can be learned from archaeological testing but, the fact that these remains could end there days in a box is wrong. These bodies were buried at Stonehenge by our ancestors for a reason and have lain there for thousands of years. This is an issue that effects all of us the world over, there is no difference in archaeologists going into Mecca and removing the stones, or going in to Vatican City and disinterring a Pope. These are the bones of this country’s ancestors and should be returned to the ground at Stonehenge.”
Thank you for your e-petition.
A licence for the removal of human remains at Stonehenge was granted by the Ministry of Justice in May 2008. One of the conditions of the licence was that the remains should be reinterred within two years and that in the intervening period they should be kept safely, privately and decently.
In April 2008, the Ministry of Justice issued a statement entitled ‘Burial Law and Archaeology’ to clarify the basis on which applications for the exhumation of human remains for archaeological examination would be treated – this can be accessed at http://www.justice.gov.uk/guidance/burials.htm.
This makes clear that licences would be issued with time limits for re-burial but where there was a legitimate need for remains to be kept for longer, it would be possible to apply for an extension.
The Government recognises that some people have strongly held beliefs with regards to human remains, but believes that these need to be balanced against the legitimate public interest in the scientific study of ancient human remains and the educational and historic value that such remains can provide.
The Ministry of Justice is currently reviewing burial law and looking at possible changes in order to reflect contemporary attitudes and sensibilities towards human remains. We expect to consult on any proposals in due course.
Visit from Master of Philosophy students and senior lecturers from Cambridge University, during which many signed our petition for the return of the ancestors. Pictured below:
You can read more about their visit on the news pages.
Meanwhile, as promised, a photo of two girls who signed our petition yesterday and with whom we shared a long chat about religious philosophy and the future of mankind, two friends one from Israel (Left) and the other from London (Right). Hello.
Samhain update
On the run up to Samhain (Halloween) we have all been very busy.
Visitors continue to sign the petition at Stonehenge, which was manned by E & G from the warband for a few days allowing Arthur, Kass and I to conduct interviews elsewhere.
Arthur was invited to record an interview for Sheffield University, home of the Riverside Project, where his answers to a common set of questions can be compared to those of other experts in the fields of heritage, archaeology and anthropology.
The questions and the draft replies that we worked on together are below:
Meanwhile Frank was interviewed by the Heritage Key team, covering the significance of Riverhenge (Bluehenge) to Druids, the sacred nature of Rivers, Reburial, Access to Stonehenge and Avebury stone circles.
We were delighted when a member of the public asked to make a video about the reburial campaign which is below:
Sheffield University Questions - Our draft answers:
Archaeological Issues:
1. Who built it?
Stonehenge is the ultimate expression of the spiritual, artistic, cultural and technical understanding of the culture that built it.
Experts can argue about whether these were the ancient hyperborean’s, the people that became known later as the Picts, the Welsh, other indigenous Brits, Atlantean priests, bronze age beaker people, pre-Celtic druids, faerie folk, giants or space men.
To us the answer to who built Stonehenge is very simple: they were ‘the ancestors’; the mighty ones that gave this island the name and reputation ‘Island of the mighty’.
2. Why did they build it?
Stonehenge is unique yet does not exist in isolation. From its time and earlier the landscape of Britain and Ireland featured circles of stone and wood, burial mounds and enclosures, strange man made hills and settlements.
We recognise the role that archaeology has played in bringing to the surface material evidence from the past, some of which was long forgotten. Interpretation is the weakness of this method, as it constantly limits the possibilities by the unjustified assumption that early peoples cannot have behaved in a civilised and intelligent fashion. A point of view very much framed in the perspective of modern thinking where we see ourselves as the ultimate expression of human achievement.
We answer that Stonehenge was built to represent the beliefs and meet needs of its people. These needs were many and so it performs a many functions, and yet is built with such beauty, precision and engineering excellence so as to justify the great effort involved. It is a statement. It is a place to meet and a place to celebrate. It is a gateway between realms. It is a place to track time and from which to map direction. It is a place apart from other places. A place from which to observe the death and rebirth of the sun and therefore death transformed into life. It is a place from which to send a message to inspire future generations. It is the perfect temple for a people wise enough to integrate all aspects of life and death and rebirth together into an endless cycle.
3. When was it built
Carbon dating places the building of Stonehenge over a five hundred year period starting 2400 BC, yet each new dig changes the timeline, often pushing this date backwards, and sometimes rewriting our understanding of the build sequence entirely. What recent digs have revealed is that Stonehenge is located on ground probably sacred at least for 1000 years before work began on the great monument itself, and the monument itself went through a series of evolutions.
We say, ‘it was built in the time of our ancestors before the iron, for iron is taboo in such sacred places’.
It was built following a harsh climatic downturn. Necessity required that the people start to farm in order to manage their food supply and this in turn required accurate keeping of the seasons made possible from observation of the relationship between the sacred land and the gods of the sky.
4. What else was going on in the region?
People from north to south and east to west had been building special places, a great variety of which survive today in Wiltshire, marking this as a very significant place within an Island littered with the special and the sacred. Clearly the ancestors were able to solve complex problems, create amazing designs and execute these in Stones with great precision using simple tools. They could achieve this only by managing people and resources effectively, and co-operating with others, not only on a local level but sometimes between peoples living hundreds of miles apart.
It was the equivalent in effort, planning and collaboration for their time, to our putting a rocket on the moon today.
5. What are the theoretical basis for your interpretation?
Our sources are more widely inclusive than that of any single scientific discipline, but our objectives are similar, to uncover the truth about our ancestors and learn from them as much as is reasonable.
We follow developments in archaeology, anthropology, climate science etc all of which contribute greatly to the evidence pool. In addition to these sources, we are accepting of the concept that some ideas from the period of the Stonehenge ancestors may have survived the transition into the iron age and beyond, so we study the folk lore and legal systems of Britain and Ireland to gain greater insight into the values and beliefs, some of which may reflect earlier traditions.
We are still guided by gods of nature, nature itself and we believe, by the ancestors also. Just as with reconstructive archaeology where actually doing refines knowledge and takes theory and selects between theories on the basis of direct experience, so we too benefit from the practise of living according to the seasons and being priests of the cycles of nature and the natural order.
We see our ancestors as wise and intelligent pragmatists with great personal resourcefulness from whom we can still learn. They have proved this to us. With much less to work with than we have, they survived, and not only survived but left behind them a great legacy that their descendants of today still look on in wonder at what they could achieve.
Present Issues
6. What is the significance of the site now?
Unesco recognises Stonehenge as a ‘world heritage site’, and as such it is seen as deserving special respect as a monument of value to people all over the world.
The DCMS view Stonehenge as a monument and a valuable source of income. No doubt they also on occasion see it as a thorn in their side to manage as they have to protect Stonehenge as a monument, oversee any public access, consider any requests for research, and try to keep the most diverse set of stakeholders happy. All of us.
Peter Carson (Director of Stonehenge for English Heritage) referred to Stonehenge as a ‘living temple’ which really sums it up for the pagan community for whom it is much less a monument than a place of reverence, a sacred place for the ancestors, and a sacred place for us today.
There is no doubt that for many people from all over the world Stonehenge is an inspiration, place of mystery, and very much loved and identified with.
7. Who should have access to it?
Everyone wants access to Stonehenge:
Tourists. New age believers. Witches. Druids. UFO theorists. Archaeologists. Theorists. Artists. Authors. Party goers and free festival supporters. Political activists.
Thanks to intervention by the Druids following the infamous ‘exclusion years’ enforced by Margret Thatcher, and a ruling by the European Court of human rights, everyone may enter the Stones four times a year. These are: Summer Solstice (the shortest night), Spring and Autumn equinoxes (night and day of equal length), and winter solstice (start of solar southern standstill, the longest night).
We have always argued that Stonehenge belongs to the people, and as such although we have a very special relationship with the place whether actual or by cultural choice and religious belief, we assert that everyone where possible should be able to interact with Stonehenge as a right.
That said, we all have to protect Stonehenge as both a uniquely special monument ,as a continuing sacred space and as the resting place of the ancestors. Today and for future generations. It is obvious to us that no single interest group should be able to use or exploit Stonehenge to the detriment of any other or to the place itself.
8. What conservation plan should there be for the monument? tunnel? by-pass?
Any solution that honours the great achievement of our ancestors and allows people to engage with and experience this heritage more fully is to be commended. The current plans are better than nothing at all, but the budget and scope are very limited.
Any plan must be more than just targeted at conservation, although we must conserve what remains to us, it must also be about retaining the genuine nature and spirit of the place. It is not a theme park, and should not be exploited as such under the guise of preservation education or research, and neither should it be mothballed and frozen in time.
The Story of Stonehenge that was started so long ago is still unfolding and developing alongside the British people, who’s journey has intertwined with that of Stonehenge such that we are now a part of each other.
9. What should the future be – should there be more excavation? Should the dead be re-buried?
We support the principle of archaeology taking place at Stonehenge and other similar ancient places and have no desire to stop this study of the past from taking place. Indeed we have a good relationship with several of the leading archaeologists currently investigating Stonehenge and the surrounding sacred landscape and look forward to their discoveries.
A serious clash of cultures comes with the retention of the ancient dead by the scientific community.
There are two extreme positions:
A: Extremely against reburial
The presumption that scientific need is greater than cultural interest of religious belief, and therefore should automatically over-ride all other considerations in all cases. In this argument, the scientific need is for extraction of all possible data and all human remains are effectively ‘data’. It follows that return of human remains for reburial represents data irrevocably lost.
Arguments made:
- Scientific need supersedes religious values and minority interests
- Reburial will lead to data being irrevocably lost
- The ancestors would want their story told
- Some excavations are rescue archaeology
- The religious concerns are bogus or ‘new age’ therefore invalid
- Reburial rites could not be made appropriately as we don’t know the original beliefs
- Reburials would be looted
- Give in once and every dig will be dictated to by hippies, eventually all science will stop
- All archaeologists and museum curators could loose their jobs and become homeless
B: Extremely for reburial
The presumption that scientific need in this case amounts to desecration, destruction of sacred spaces, and is not justified by the benefits. In this argument religious belief and cultural interests cannot be violated and hence reburial should always take place and exhumation should rarely if ever be allowed to happen.
- Religious and cultural value of ancestors in situ outweighs all scientific value
- Excavation and retention is desecration, and disempowering our connection to our ancestors
- The true story of an individual cannot be recovered, and interpretation of evidence is sometimes in complete disregard to our beliefs or even insulting towards us.
- Rescue archaeology does not excuse retention of remains
- Any rite respecting all gods would be appropriate, this is a non issue.
- Reburials would not be looted, especially if not made with grave goods.
- Fail to resist now and nothing sacred will be left in our landscape
- Future generations would be unable to call upon the ancestors in situ, a great connection would be irrevocably lost.
At Stonehenge we approached the removal of the Aubrey hole 7 ancestors with positivity until we learned that they might not be returned for reburial. We consider that reburial for these particular ancestors is essential, appropriate and the decent thing to do.
Our proposal, we consider to be a model of effective compromise, that allows for the reburial of our ancestors and our continuing relationship with them without costing archaeology its data. It does require the will from both sides to reach an accord and to be willing to recognise the value of the other parties needs as being of equal merit.
- The human remains may be fully studied for two years
- Small samples of material may be retained indefinitely for future tests
- Reburial will be within sealed slow decay vessels so as to preserve the ‘data’ value of the remains in the earth against the unlikely requirement to examine them again.
- Reburial would be to all previously excavated Aubrey holes allowing for new analysis on the Aubrey holes to compare with the latest evidence from digs elsewhere, whilst re-consecrating the original circular burial arrangement.
Stonehenge is a favourably unique situation.
- Guarded 24/7/365 hence looting is unlikely.
- Reburial will create more interest in the ancestors and add to their story a new chapter
- The ancestors are part of Stonehenge, its magic and its mystery, therefore Stonehenge remains complete.
- Ancestors in-situ are actively invoked and revered at Stonehenge and are likely to always be so.
- It is the decent thing to do.
We have sought to present our argument as one of common decency shared not only by many pagans but by people of all religions and nationalities.
Our petition has so far been signed by over 5000 people from 60 countries and as many different religions.
28-10-2009 Emma Restall Orr
Author and senior Druidess Emma Restall Orr, leader of the HAD group, has very kindly given us an interview in which she covers her own personal views on reburial.
27-10-2009 Section 25 extension requested
Mike Parker Pearson promised us that if a request to the Dept of Justice to retain the bones of our ancestors was submitted we would be told.
This has now happened, and true to his word we have been informed.
November
6-11-2009
In letter received from DCMS
“The Department notes the importance of these remains to the Druids and that, culturally and historically, they are very significant to many people. However, the Department’s role in this issue is limited to the Scheduled Monument Consent to excavate at Stonehenge. As you are aware, policy responsibility for the exhumation of human remains lies with the Ministry of Justice. In terms of the licence granted for the remains from the Aubrey Hole, I understand that, as with any other licence, it is possible for anyone to apply to vary the conditions, including the requirement to rebury within two years.
Therefore, I am sorry to say that the Culture Minister cannot make a commitment, as you request, to the reburial of these remains. I suggest you continue to discuss the issue with the lead archaeologist, Mike Parker-Pearson, to ensure a suitable arrangement for the final resting place of these remains, balancing the wider public interest in Stonehenge and those buried there. “
January 20th 2010
Imitation, it is said, is the highest form of flattery.
It has come to our attention that another pagan group are taking information from this and other web sites to make it appear on their own that they are very much at the centre of events regarding the reburial of the Stonehenge ancestors. If they wish to misrepresent themselves that’s entirely their issue, however, all honourable pagan groups with a legitimate interest have agreed to work through either ourselves or HAD on this matter.
It should be obvious to any observer that we stand the best chance of effectively communicating our point of view to the authorities if our efforts to do so are consistent. HAD and ourselves have cooperated in order to ensure this. We care only about preserving the delicate communication process that we hope will lead to our Stonehenge ancestors being eventually returned to the earth at Stonehenge and we must put that first.
Unfortunately it is now necessary that updates to this page will be made after a time delay.